| I was surfing on ESPN when I saw the following article...
U.S. Congress to the Next Generation --Drop Dead:
Announcing the
economic stimulus package agreed to last week by both parties in the
House of Representatives, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi declared
that typical Americans can expect to receive a "stipend" of $300 to
$1,200. Stipend -- will we get a federally funded sherry hour, too?
Calling a government check a "stipend," to make it seem lofty and
grand, reflects the modern affection CEOs have for calling the cash
they receive "compensation" rather than pay, and consultants and
speakers insist on saying they are receiving "honoraria" rather than
pay. There is nothing wrong with receiving pay! And no reason to employ
euphemisms.The stimulus bill will cost about $150 billion and
consists entirely of deficit spending. The secondary euphemism being
employed in Washington is to call the checks "tax rebates." But they
are not rebates, meaning partial returns of monies paid -- they are
pure borrowing. Which is to say, Congress will award most current
American adults $300 to $1,200 each, then send the bill to future
American adults. Suppose that instead, each American adult today set
aside $300 at 5 percent interest. In 20 years, that money would grow to
$800, and likely much more if invested in stocks. Such savings would be
good for the U.S. economy, which, since 2001, has seen a negative
national savings rate. China's national savings rate is currently
almost 50 percent. Savings is one reason the Chinese economy is growing
far faster than the U.S. economy; the U.S. savings rate is close to
negative-4 percent, and our economic growth is sputtering. But rather than help the U.S. economy grow in a
generous way that forgoes a little today to gain a lot tomorrow, the
American people -- through their representatives in Congress -- just
reached into the pockets of future citizens in order to spend more on
themselves right now. Explain to me why this is considered a populist
action by Congress?Bear in mind, the stimulus package
announced last week is only an agreement between the two parties in the
House. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in the Senate currently are
scrambling to add their own pet projects to the legislation -- whenever
a big spending bill moves, there's always a bidding war in which
Republicans and Democrats vie to see who can stage the biggest
giveaway. The damage to the national debt might get worse because
what's happening now is the environment Congress likes best -- an
environment of zero fiscal discipline. Lobbyists for retirees, who
already are subsidized by the young, are complaining that their special
interest isn't being showered with free money by the stimulus bill;
lobbyists for pork-barrel projects that could never withstand logical
scrutiny are maneuvering to wrap them in the flag and add them to the
stimulus bill. By the time the stimulus bill leaves Capitol Hill, the
young might be saddled with yet more debt so that members of Congress
can congratulate themselves as they hand checks to politically
connected fat-cat donors or to retirees already drawing out of Social
Security far more than they put in, plus interest. Next,
recall that on Jan. 4, 2007, both houses of Congress agreed with
considerable fanfare on the Paygo measure, which stated that under no
circumstances -- under no circumstances, never, regardless of
conditions! -- would Congress enact any bill that increases the federal
debt. According to the Paygo legislation, the House and Senate are
forbidden even to debate legislation that would increase the debt. ("It
shall not be in order to consider any bill, joint resolution, amendment
or conference report if the provisions of such measure affecting direct
spending and revenues have the net effect of increasing the deficit …")
Paygo rules specify that all bills causing appropriations increases or
tax favors must be offset be spending reductions or tax increases. When
Paygo was enacted, many members of Congress from both parties,
prominently Speaker Pelosi, patted themselves on the back in public. How long did this incredible resolve last? Six weeks
ago, Congress passed a reduction of the Alternative Minimum Tax; the
bill cut taxes by $51 billion but provides no offsetting revenues.
Originally, the measure would have reduced the AMT for the middle class
while raising taxes by an equal amount on the upper crust of venture
capitalists and hedge-fund managers. All the revenue increases ended up
deleted -- hedge-fund managers showered members of Congress with campaign donations
-- but the tax cuts were approved. Congress ladled out the $51 billion
entirely from deficit spending, then handed the bill to the young. Now,
the stimulus package goes even further, at least $150 billion in gravy
without spending cuts or offsetting revenue increases. Barely 12 months
after pledging never, ever again to add to the federal debt, Congress
will add at least $201 billion to the federal debt. The federal deficit
for the most recent fiscal year, which ended before either of the new
actions, was $163 billion. Congress has, in the past six weeks alone,
added more to the federal debt than the entire federal deficit for the
most recent fiscal year.It's impossible to be sure, but a
rough guess might be that every dollar added to the deficit today
represents two dollars subtracted from future economic growth -- which
in turn means two dollars taken from the pockets of tomorrow's American
adults. This is a cynical exercise, robbing future Americans in order
to please voters today, and to inspire interest groups to make
political donations to incumbents. When are citizens under 30 going to
wake up to the disagreeable fact that the country's current leadership,
of both parties, is giving them the shaft in order to heap special
favors on current voters who refuse to live within their means? Then
handing the young the bill. Guess where this article is from???
It was a piece of ESPN's Tuesday Morning Quarterback. As well as being a sportswriter, Gregg Easterbrook is also a Brookings fellow and he's got it spot on. I'm saving my $600 "rebate", because Lord knows although Congress is giving me $600, they're big fat liars that have already spent $1200.
Learnings:
- ESPN, your home for both sports and political news.
- Stop feeling so good about your "rebate"
- Everyone in Congress is a big fat liar...(Senator McCain, Senator Clinton, Senator Barack). Now to choose the lesser evil of them all.
|
